About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
at the international monetary fund, annie lowry an economic policy reporter for "the new york times." steven moore, editorial writer for "the wall street journal." ken, you tear financial crisis guru here. forget the politics. just give us the math. if washington fails to avert the cliff, the worst-case scenario will be the combination of tax hikes and spending cuts. what does that do to our economy? >> well, if they don't come to a deal and then sit there all next year and don't come to a deal, we will go back into recession. it will be very, very ugly. and the united states is one of the few bright spots in the world and it will be ugly to have the whole world go into recession. but i don't think that's likely. i think if we pass for a month then they'll eventually pass something. but it shows the dysfunction in washington of not being able to pass anything. by the way, ali, the debt ceiling's coming up. they're not agreeing on that. so even if they agree on this, then in a month or two they're going to be in the same position on the debt ceiling. >> and our debt ceiling actually comes to a head
of spending restraight. >> i want to bring stephen moore back into the conversation. a lot of people don't like grover norquist you've defended him. you come from the same place in a lot of things. here's where i take issue. he said increasing taxes avoids the conversation on having the spending discussion. i said i don't think that's causal. i think we can agree we're not having a robust-enough conversation on how to deal with spending in this country and how to make government more efficient. is it a fact by raising taxes we're just not going to have that discussion? >> yeah, i believe so. i believe every time you raise taxes it reduces the pressure to cut spending and i agree with grover on that i want to take issue on one thing you said to grover that i think is a little unfair. the vote we had last week, the job boehner plan b, which actually there was no vote -- >> you know, you've been saying, these guys are just following the instructions of grover nor quest. look, i actually think republicans made a mistake personally in not approving plan b. but you know, the people voted again
rake, only on the money you make on the margin. stephen moore is here from the wall street journal and he's ready to jump out of his skin after i said that. he specializes in telling me why i'm wrong. and our other guest, david johnston wrote "the fine print." stephen, you are our resident anti-tax crusader. i totally agree every penny counts when it comes to your own money. when you compare the taxes most americans paid in past decades i don't get why republicans are screaming bloody murder about this. what would be so bad with the wealthiest among us chipping in a little bit more? i'm emphasizing just a little bit more. >> when you showed that chart of the tax rates that was exactly accurate. we had 70% tax rates in the '70s. that didn't turn out well. then we cut the rates significantly. went down to 50%, 28%. the rates went up to 35%. i would love to see you super impose on that chart the share of taxes paid by the rich. here is the interesting thing. >>> one of the reason the deficit went down is you had a big increase in the number of people making money. they paid more tax.
comfort in faith. and joining me now is the reverend mark moore, he leads a small congregation in newtown's town center. normally your church has about 20 worshippers. >> we're a tiny little parish, one of two parishes directly in the village of sandy hook. >> what was it like today? >> we had a service yesterday at 12:00 to address this issue. it was packed with people. and even reporters from all over the world were there. australia, russia, italy, france. england, germany. all over the world. following this story. all the major networks were there. you know, cnn was there, of course. and so this is an international event. and so the churches have a particular role when something like this happens. that is to help people make some kind of sense of it. when it first happened, everyone, including me was in a state of complete shock. i heard, i'm the same as anyone else, a sense of sickening sense of how could this possibly happen. and you try to wrap your mind around it. and comprehend that you can't, it's just impossible. even the ways that we typically try to understand events like this
make on the margin. steven moore is ready to jump out of his skin after i just said what i said. david k. johnson is a pulitzer prize winning journalist. his latest big, how big companies use plain english to rob you blind. steven, while i agree that every penny counts when it comes to your own money, when you compare the taxes most americans paid out in past decades, i don't get why republicans are screaming bloody murder about this. what would be so bad with the wealthest chipping in just a little bit more? >> when you showed that chart of the tax rates and that was exactly accurate. we had 70% rates in the 1970s. by the way, that didn't turn out so well, then we cut the rates significantly. 50%, then 28 and then the rates went up to 35%. but i would love to see you super impose on that chart. the share of taxes paid by the rich. here is the interesting thing. if you put the share paid by the rich, as the share came down, the share paid by the rich went up to almost 40% today. >> doesn't that just mean there are more rich people or that they make more money? >> yep and that's what we
out, i spoke with stephen moore from the "wall street journal". >> looking forward, not backward, the republican dangers, there may be an accelerating economy. you can't simply say obama is bad. you have to have an affirmative message. it has to be economically inclusive. that means i think ruling away from the myth of the heroic entrepreneur as the main hero and also the main victim of the american economy and understand that the people who have been leading big companies are actually doing pretty well. the harm is to the middle. >> stephen, talk to me about this. the fact is we do think the entrepreneur as heroic in the u.s. how do you square that circle? >> i think the backbone is the entrepreneur. i think republicans have to make this connection with workers that, you know, if you hurt the businesses who are hurting jobs, i don't think they've done a good job of doing that. i certainly agree that health care is a big issue. i kind of agree with david that republicans have kind attacked the obama idea. i think reasons have to a very robust alternative that might be rejected in
moore from the "wall street journal." and a contributing editor at "newsweek" and author of a new book, how did he write this so fast "why romney lost. "looking forward, not backward. the republican dangers, there may be an accelerating economy. you can't simply say obama is bad. you have to have an affirmative message. it has to be economically inclusive. that means, i think, moving away from the myth of the heroic entrepreneur as the main hero and also the main victim of the american economy and understand that the people who have been leading big companies are actually doing pretty well. the harm has been done to the american middle which is experiencing slow growth. what we need to see above all are control of health care costs. that's the key to getting middle incomes rising again. >> stephen, talk to me about this. the fact is we do think the entrepreneur as heroic in the u.s. how do you square that circle? >> i think the backbone is the entrepreneur. it's the person who sets out the shingle and employs work eers. i think republicans have to make this connection with workers that
's bring stephen moore in. i think you're going to disagree with my notion that government can be all that helpful to our runner. that government can be helpful other than by getting out of the way. i think you're going to suggest lower taxes, lower spending, fewer regulations. for the sake of this argument and analogy, accept that taxes are going up. there are many soifr who is argue that there is not a role for government in this let the markets and private industry handle it. but they haven't, and we've got substandard roads and bridges and electricity and broadband infrastructure. all of this means we're less attractive to business. do you accept that the government has a role to play in the rebuilding of america's infrastructure? >> well, sure. and by the way, i love your optimism, ali, i hope you're exactly right about 2013 and 2014. we've been spending money on the programs. a lot of the school buildings, i mean that's been going on in a large magnitude in the united states. what i like and where we might find some agreement, you know, i do think private-sector dollars can lead
journal" editorial writer steve moore and chrystia free land. i asked ken how you convince lawmakers that infrastructure money is well spent and how do you ensure that the money is, in fact, well spent? >> i think you have to have firm regulatory oversight. it's not something you can just spend the money and walk away from. but there are the electricity grid, water, aging bridges. there's so many things hardening our cyber infrastructure against terrorist attacks and such. many, many things. elt doesn't have to be public money. there's no reason we have to be so statused about this that we can't have more private money. we have telephone companies, cable companies, we did the railroads that way. it doesn't all have to be public money. >> steven is nodding his head vigorously. you're going to disagree with the assertion that government can be helpful. a new analogy. that government can be helpful other than by getting out of the way. i think you'll suggest lower taxes, lower spending, fewer regulations. but let's for the sake of this argument and this analogy accept taxes are going up
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)